Status of gross anatomy in the U.S. and Canada: Dilemma for the 21st century

T. J. Collins, R. L. Given, C. E. Hulsebosch, B. T. Miller

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    87 Citations (Scopus)

    Abstract

    As a component of a recent academic review, the Department of Anatomy and Neurosciences faculty at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, Texas, developed a questionnaire designed to compare the curricula, direction, and challenges of their department with the approximately 140 anatomy departments in the U.S. and Canada. The response was overwhelming in that over 80% of the schools returned a completed questionnaire. One of the areas of interest revealed by this survey was a growing concern over significant changes in both medical school curricula and the future of anatomy departments. Most departments still used traditional lectures to present course material and the majority of the scheduled contact hours were in the dissection laboratory; however, other teaching formats, such as case studies and small group discussions, accounted for significantly more of the teaching effort. Nearly 20% of the schools were making major modifications in their teaching methods. The general trend was to include more integrated, problem-based learning and computer-assisted teaching while reducing overall content, didactic lectures, and rote memorization. The role and need for traditionally trained gross anatomists in medical education appeared to be diminishing as curricular reform moved toward more student-directed, faculty- facilitated programs. Concurrently, the recruitment and career development of gross anatomy faculty appeared to be influenced more by funding status than by academic training or teaching experience, as most departmental chairman were willing to hire non-anatomists and 'train' them to assume an often reduced teaching load in gross anatomy courses. In addition, fewer graduate students were being trained in classical gross anatomy, a trend that better suited the emerging student-directed medical school curricula. The reduction in classically trained anatomists also appeared to reflect the widespread practice whereby anatomy faculty were rewarded far more for research than for teaching. Although the continued inclusion of gross anatomy in medical education appeared to be assured, its traditional mode of presentation and academic prominence will likely change by the turn of the century.

    Original languageEnglish (US)
    Pages (from-to)275-296
    Number of pages22
    JournalClinical Anatomy
    Volume7
    Issue number5
    StatePublished - 1994

    Fingerprint

    Canada
    Anatomy
    Teaching
    Curriculum
    Anatomists
    Students
    Medical Education
    Medical Schools
    Problem-Based Learning
    Neurosciences
    Dissection
    Research
    Surveys and Questionnaires

    Keywords

    • academic review
    • curriculum
    • student-directed curricula

    ASJC Scopus subject areas

    • Anatomy

    Cite this

    Collins, T. J., Given, R. L., Hulsebosch, C. E., & Miller, B. T. (1994). Status of gross anatomy in the U.S. and Canada: Dilemma for the 21st century. Clinical Anatomy, 7(5), 275-296.

    Status of gross anatomy in the U.S. and Canada : Dilemma for the 21st century. / Collins, T. J.; Given, R. L.; Hulsebosch, C. E.; Miller, B. T.

    In: Clinical Anatomy, Vol. 7, No. 5, 1994, p. 275-296.

    Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

    Collins, TJ, Given, RL, Hulsebosch, CE & Miller, BT 1994, 'Status of gross anatomy in the U.S. and Canada: Dilemma for the 21st century', Clinical Anatomy, vol. 7, no. 5, pp. 275-296.
    Collins TJ, Given RL, Hulsebosch CE, Miller BT. Status of gross anatomy in the U.S. and Canada: Dilemma for the 21st century. Clinical Anatomy. 1994;7(5):275-296.
    Collins, T. J. ; Given, R. L. ; Hulsebosch, C. E. ; Miller, B. T. / Status of gross anatomy in the U.S. and Canada : Dilemma for the 21st century. In: Clinical Anatomy. 1994 ; Vol. 7, No. 5. pp. 275-296.
    @article{3fd47623768b4423a506ec6a06f9bd0d,
    title = "Status of gross anatomy in the U.S. and Canada: Dilemma for the 21st century",
    abstract = "As a component of a recent academic review, the Department of Anatomy and Neurosciences faculty at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, Texas, developed a questionnaire designed to compare the curricula, direction, and challenges of their department with the approximately 140 anatomy departments in the U.S. and Canada. The response was overwhelming in that over 80{\%} of the schools returned a completed questionnaire. One of the areas of interest revealed by this survey was a growing concern over significant changes in both medical school curricula and the future of anatomy departments. Most departments still used traditional lectures to present course material and the majority of the scheduled contact hours were in the dissection laboratory; however, other teaching formats, such as case studies and small group discussions, accounted for significantly more of the teaching effort. Nearly 20{\%} of the schools were making major modifications in their teaching methods. The general trend was to include more integrated, problem-based learning and computer-assisted teaching while reducing overall content, didactic lectures, and rote memorization. The role and need for traditionally trained gross anatomists in medical education appeared to be diminishing as curricular reform moved toward more student-directed, faculty- facilitated programs. Concurrently, the recruitment and career development of gross anatomy faculty appeared to be influenced more by funding status than by academic training or teaching experience, as most departmental chairman were willing to hire non-anatomists and 'train' them to assume an often reduced teaching load in gross anatomy courses. In addition, fewer graduate students were being trained in classical gross anatomy, a trend that better suited the emerging student-directed medical school curricula. The reduction in classically trained anatomists also appeared to reflect the widespread practice whereby anatomy faculty were rewarded far more for research than for teaching. Although the continued inclusion of gross anatomy in medical education appeared to be assured, its traditional mode of presentation and academic prominence will likely change by the turn of the century.",
    keywords = "academic review, curriculum, student-directed curricula",
    author = "Collins, {T. J.} and Given, {R. L.} and Hulsebosch, {C. E.} and Miller, {B. T.}",
    year = "1994",
    language = "English (US)",
    volume = "7",
    pages = "275--296",
    journal = "Clinical Anatomy",
    issn = "0897-3806",
    publisher = "Wiley-Liss Inc.",
    number = "5",

    }

    TY - JOUR

    T1 - Status of gross anatomy in the U.S. and Canada

    T2 - Dilemma for the 21st century

    AU - Collins, T. J.

    AU - Given, R. L.

    AU - Hulsebosch, C. E.

    AU - Miller, B. T.

    PY - 1994

    Y1 - 1994

    N2 - As a component of a recent academic review, the Department of Anatomy and Neurosciences faculty at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, Texas, developed a questionnaire designed to compare the curricula, direction, and challenges of their department with the approximately 140 anatomy departments in the U.S. and Canada. The response was overwhelming in that over 80% of the schools returned a completed questionnaire. One of the areas of interest revealed by this survey was a growing concern over significant changes in both medical school curricula and the future of anatomy departments. Most departments still used traditional lectures to present course material and the majority of the scheduled contact hours were in the dissection laboratory; however, other teaching formats, such as case studies and small group discussions, accounted for significantly more of the teaching effort. Nearly 20% of the schools were making major modifications in their teaching methods. The general trend was to include more integrated, problem-based learning and computer-assisted teaching while reducing overall content, didactic lectures, and rote memorization. The role and need for traditionally trained gross anatomists in medical education appeared to be diminishing as curricular reform moved toward more student-directed, faculty- facilitated programs. Concurrently, the recruitment and career development of gross anatomy faculty appeared to be influenced more by funding status than by academic training or teaching experience, as most departmental chairman were willing to hire non-anatomists and 'train' them to assume an often reduced teaching load in gross anatomy courses. In addition, fewer graduate students were being trained in classical gross anatomy, a trend that better suited the emerging student-directed medical school curricula. The reduction in classically trained anatomists also appeared to reflect the widespread practice whereby anatomy faculty were rewarded far more for research than for teaching. Although the continued inclusion of gross anatomy in medical education appeared to be assured, its traditional mode of presentation and academic prominence will likely change by the turn of the century.

    AB - As a component of a recent academic review, the Department of Anatomy and Neurosciences faculty at the University of Texas Medical Branch in Galveston, Texas, developed a questionnaire designed to compare the curricula, direction, and challenges of their department with the approximately 140 anatomy departments in the U.S. and Canada. The response was overwhelming in that over 80% of the schools returned a completed questionnaire. One of the areas of interest revealed by this survey was a growing concern over significant changes in both medical school curricula and the future of anatomy departments. Most departments still used traditional lectures to present course material and the majority of the scheduled contact hours were in the dissection laboratory; however, other teaching formats, such as case studies and small group discussions, accounted for significantly more of the teaching effort. Nearly 20% of the schools were making major modifications in their teaching methods. The general trend was to include more integrated, problem-based learning and computer-assisted teaching while reducing overall content, didactic lectures, and rote memorization. The role and need for traditionally trained gross anatomists in medical education appeared to be diminishing as curricular reform moved toward more student-directed, faculty- facilitated programs. Concurrently, the recruitment and career development of gross anatomy faculty appeared to be influenced more by funding status than by academic training or teaching experience, as most departmental chairman were willing to hire non-anatomists and 'train' them to assume an often reduced teaching load in gross anatomy courses. In addition, fewer graduate students were being trained in classical gross anatomy, a trend that better suited the emerging student-directed medical school curricula. The reduction in classically trained anatomists also appeared to reflect the widespread practice whereby anatomy faculty were rewarded far more for research than for teaching. Although the continued inclusion of gross anatomy in medical education appeared to be assured, its traditional mode of presentation and academic prominence will likely change by the turn of the century.

    KW - academic review

    KW - curriculum

    KW - student-directed curricula

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0028101082&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0028101082&partnerID=8YFLogxK

    M3 - Article

    AN - SCOPUS:0028101082

    VL - 7

    SP - 275

    EP - 296

    JO - Clinical Anatomy

    JF - Clinical Anatomy

    SN - 0897-3806

    IS - 5

    ER -